Van Der Poel, S., & Davis, J. B. (2018). Ensuring human rights in the provision of fertility care and infertility interventions. Fertility and Sterility. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.780
Van Der Poel S, Davis JB. Ensuring human rights in the provision of fertility care and infertility interventions. Fertility and Sterility. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.780
Van Der Poel, S., and J. B. Davis. "Ensuring human rights in the provision of fertility care and infertility interventions." Fertility and Sterility, 2018.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Authors urge fertility care rights for single, LGBTQ people
In a review for draft recommendations to the World Health Organization, van der Poel and Davis argue fertility care rights should include single and non-heterosexual people. Reports on unmet need rarely count them, and the authors call the gap glaring. The review drew 12 principles from 102 of 488 sources, including non-discrimination.
Key Findings
The authors call for care that "fulfills, protects and respects all individuals". They say unmet-need reports rarely measure non-heterosexual couples, single individuals or key/neglected populations.
The review generated 12 principles, covering issues such as non-discrimination, non-stigmatization, informed decision-making, autonomy, sharing of benefits and the well-being of parents and children born.
The authors call the disparity in recognition of need, and the resulting lack of access to care, "glaring".
The authors conclude that a human rights framework "was required" for the draft clinical recommendations to WHO.
The search identified 488 articles and documents, and 102 were found appropriate. The 102 were categorized using 9 principles WHO had previously identified for contraception.
The Authors' Position
“This need for access to care rarely measures those couples in non-heterosexual relationships, single individuals or in key/neglected populations. This disparity in recognition of need, and resultant lack of access to care is glaring.”
Quoted verbatim from this paper.
Interpretation
The library holds the conference abstract only. The design is a literature review with a systematic analysis, and the abstract reports counts of sources found and kept. The argument about single and non-heterosexual people comes from the authors' framing of unmet need. The abstract names some topics the 12 principles cover and gives no full wording for any principle. The work addresses policy and law and reports no patient outcomes.
RRM Context
Restorative reproductive medicine values informed consent, the couple, and the health of parents and children. The abstract's themes of choice, autonomy and family well-being fit those values. The abstract names no fertility interventions.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Objective
There are reports that define the significant unmet need for access to fertility care and infertility interventions for heterosexual couples - those who experience involuntary childlessness and who desire a biological child. This need for access to care rarely measures those couples in non-heterosexual relationships, single individuals or in key/neglected populations. This disparity in recognition of need, and resultant lack of access to care is glaring. Universal access and attainment of the highest standard of care requires the provision of high-quality information and services that fulfills, protects and respects all individuals. The objective of this study was to identify the key principles that support access to fertility care and infertility interventions, and to provide a human rights framework to guide processes during the development of draft recommendations to the World Health Organization (WHO) for clinical practice.
Design
To evaluate the public health and human rights and gender impact on infertility, a literature review and systematic analysis were conducted to look at the following questions. What are the existing policies, public health directives and research evidence gaps impacting gender and human rights in the context of involuntary childlessness and infertility; and, What human rights principles guide the development and implementation of fertility care and infertility related laws, policies and systems?
Materials and Methods
A detailed search strategy in collaboration with the WHO-HQ librarian, introducing various combinations of a predetermined set of terms was undertaken to identify primary literature, systematic reviews and gray literature, including documentation regarding current status of human rights and gender equality within policy and practices.
Results
Using the search strategy defined, we were able to identify 488 articles and documents, of which 102 were found appropriate. They were then categorized using 9 principles previously identified by WHO and used to address the topic of contraception. From this process, we generated a list of 12 principles which will be presented that cover issues such as non-discrimination, non-stigmatization as well as informed-decision making and autonomy, sharing of benefits and ensuring provision of care that includes the recognition of the health and well-being of the parent or parents as well as the children born.
Conclusions
During the systematic review of the published data and evidence for the development of draft clinical recommendations to be presented to and for the World Health Organization consideration, it was clear that a human rights framework was required. Our systematic review process used research and policy evidence to support the development of a framework of principles that can better ensure different human rights dimensions are clearly and systematically integrated into the provision of fertility care information and fertility interventions and services.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2025
Ethics and Policy › Policy and Regulation › Access and Coverage Policy · Clinical Guidelines and Standards › Guidelines by Clinical Area › Fertility and Infertility Guidelines · Cost and Access › Access and Coverage › Workforce and Availability
Sheryl van der Poel, Joseph B. Davis
S Poel, Joe Davis, Joey Davis, J Davis
DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.780 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.780 Van Der Poel et al. 2018, Van Der Poel 2018